CHAPTER VI.

THE OUTER PLANETS.

Jupiter, the greatest planet of the Solar System, has perhaps been more

persistently studied by astronomers than any other. In the early

nineteenth century the prevalent idea was that Jupiter was a world

similar to the Earth, only much larger,—a view held by Herschel and

other famous astronomers, and put forward by Brewster in ‘More Worlds

than One.’ This view prevailed for many years, although Buffon in 1778,

and Kant in 1785, had stated their belief in the idea that Jupiter was

still in a state of great heat—in fact, that the great planet was a

semi-sun. This idea, however, was long in being adopted by astronomers,

and very little attention was paid to Nasmyth’s expression of the same

opinion in 1853. The older view still held the field—namely, that the

belts of Jupiter represented trade-winds, and that a world similar to

the terrestrial lay below the Jovian clouds. In 1860 _George Philip

Bond_ (1826-1865), director of the Harvard Observatory, found from

experiments that Jupiter seemed to give out more light than it received,

but he did not dare to suggest that Jupiter was self-luminous,

considering that the inherent light might result from Jovian auroras.

In 1865 Zöllner showed that the rapid motions of the cloud-belts on both

Jupiter and Saturn indicated a high internal temperature. At the

distance of Jupiter sun-heat is only one twenty-seventh as great as on

the Earth, and would be quite incapable of forming clouds many times

denser than those on the Earth. In 1871 Zöllner drew attention to the

equatorial acceleration of Jupiter, analogous to the same phenomenon on

the Sun. In 1870 these opinions of Zöllner’s were adopted and supported

by Proctor in his ‘Other Worlds than Ours.’ In his subsequent volumes

Proctor did much to popularise the idea, which is now accepted all over

the astronomical world.

During the century many valuable observations on Jupiter were made by

numerous observers, among them Airy, Mädler, Webb, Schmidt, and others.

Much time was devoted to the accurate determination of the rotation

period, which was fixed at 9 hours 55 minutes 36·56 seconds by Denning

in observations from 1880 to 1903. No really important discovery was

made till 1878, when Niesten at Brussels discovered the “great red

spot,” a ruddy object 25,000 miles long by 7000 broad, attached to a

white zone beneath the southern equatorial belt. This remarkable object

has been observed ever since. In 1879 its colour was brick-red and very

conspicuous, but it soon began to fade, and Riccó’s observation at

Palermo in 1883 was thought to be the last. After some months, however,

it brightened up, and, notwithstanding changes of form and colour, it is

still visible, a permanent feature of the Jovian disc. In 1879 a group

of “faculæ,” similar to those on the Sun, was observed at Moscow by

_Theodor Alexandrovitch Brédikhine_ (1831-1904), and at Potsdam by

_Wilhelm Oswald Lohse_ (born 1845). It was soon observed that the

rotation period, as determined from the great red spot, was not

constant, but continually increasing. A white spot in the vicinity

completed its rotation in 5½ minutes less, indicating the differences of

rotation on Jupiter.

The great red spot has been observed since its discovery by Denning at

Bristol and _George Hough_ (born 1836) at Chicago. Twenty-eight years of

observation have not solved the mystery of its nature. The researches

made on it, in the words of Miss Clerke, “afforded grounds only for

negative conclusions as to its nature. It certainly did not represent

the outpourings of a Jovian volcano; it was in no sense attached to the

Jovian soil—if the phrase have any application to the planet; it was not

a mere disclosure of a glowing mass elsewhere seethed over by rolling

vapours.”

In 1870 _Arthur Cowper Ranyard_ (1845-1894), the well-known English

astronomer, began to collect records of unusual phenomena on the Jovian

disc to see if any period regulated their appearance. He came to the

conclusion that, on the whole, there was harmony between the markings on

Jupiter and the eleven-year period on the Sun. The theory of inherent

light in Jupiter, however, has not been confirmed. The great planet was

examined spectroscopically by Huggins from 1862 to 1864, and by Vogel

from 1871 to 1873. The spectrum showed, in addition to the lines of

reflected sunlight, some lines indicating aqueous vapour, and others

which have not been identified with any terrestrial substance. A

photographic study of the spectrum of Jupiter was made at the Lowell

Observatory by Slipher in 1904, probably the most exhaustive

investigation on the subject. The spectroscope has, however, given

little support to the theory of inherent light, and “we are driven to

conclude that native emissions from Jupiter’s visible surface are local

and fitful, not permanent and general.”

Herschel’s idea, that the rotations of the four satellites of Jupiter

were coincident with their revolutions, has on the whole been confirmed

by recent researches, although in the case of the two near satellites

(Io and Europa) W. H. Pickering’s observations in 1893 indicated shorter

rotation periods. There is much to learn regarding the geography of the

satellites, although in 1891 Schaeberle and Campbell at the Lick

Observatory observed belts on the surface of Ganymede, the third

satellite analogous to those on Jupiter. Surface-markings on the

satellites have also been seen by Barnard at the Lick Observatory, and

by Douglass at Flagstaff.

Since the time of Galileo no addition had been made to the system of

satellites revolving round Jupiter. Profound surprise was created,

therefore, by the announcement of the discovery of a fifth satellite by

Barnard at the Lick Observatory, on September 9, 1892. The satellite,

one of the faintest of telescopic objects, was discovered with the great

36-inch telescope, and its existence was soon confirmed by _Andrew

Anslie Common_ (1841-1903), with his great 5-foot reflector at Ealing,

near London. The new satellite was found by Barnard to revolve round

Jupiter in 11 hours 57 minutes at a mean distance of 112,000 miles.

Although the existence of other satellites of Jupiter was predicted by

Sir _Robert Stawell Ball_ (born 1840) soon after the discovery of the

fifth, much surprise was created by the announcement, in January 1905,

that a sixth satellite had been discovered by Perrine, who, in the

following month, announced the discovery of a seventh. These discoveries

were made by photography, the objects being very faint. The periods of

revolution were found to be 242 days and 200 days for the sixth and

seventh satellites respectively, the mean distances being 6,968,000 and

6,136,000 miles. It is possible that they may belong to a zone of

asteroidal satellites. In fact, the fifth moon may belong to a similar

zone, so that Jupiter may have two asteroidal zones; but this is

anticipating future discovery.

A particular charm has always attached itself to the study of Saturn,

the ringed planet. The magnificent system of rings has for two and a

half centuries been the object of wonder and admiration in the Solar

System, and accordingly they have been exhaustively studied by many

eminent observers. While observing the two bright rings of Saturn on

June 10, 1838, Galle noticed what Miss Clerke calls “a veil-like

extension of the lucid ring across half the dark space separating it

from the planet.” No attention, however, was paid to Galle’s

observation. On November 15, 1850, _William Cranch Bond_ (1789-1859), of

the Harvard Observatory in Massachusetts, discovered the same phenomenon

under its true form—that of a dusky ring interior to the more brilliant

one. A fortnight later, before the news of Bond’s observation, Dawes

made the same discovery independently at Wateringbury in England. This

ring is known as the dusky or “crape” ring.

The discovery of the dusky ring brought to the front the problem of the

composition of the ring-system. Laplace and Herschel considered the

rings to be solid, but this was denied in 1848 by _Edouard Roche_

(1820-1880), who believed them to consist of small particles, and in

1851 by G. P. Bond, who asserted that the variations in the appearance

of the system were sufficient to negative the idea of their solidity;

but he suggested that the rings were fluid. In 1857 the question was

taken up by the Scottish physicist, _James Clerk-Maxwell_ (1831-1879),

who proved by mathematical calculation that the rings could be neither

solid nor fluid, but were due to an aggregation of small particles, so

closely crowded together as to present the appearance of a continuous

whole. Clerk-Maxwell’s explanation—which had been suggested by the

younger Cassini in 1715, and by Thomas Wright in 1750—was at once

adopted, and has since been proved by observation. In 1888 _Hugo

Seeliger_ (born 1849), director of the Munich Observatory, showed from

photometric observations the correctness of the satellite-theory; while

Barnard in 1889 witnessed an eclipse of the satellite Japetus by the

dusky ring. The satellite did not disappear, but was seen with perfect

distinctness. The final demonstration of the meteoric nature of the

rings was made by Keeler at the Alleghany Observatory in 1895, with the

aid of the spectroscope. By means of Doppler’s principle, he found that

the inner edge of the ring revolved in a much shorter time than the

outer, proving conclusively that they could not be solid. This was

confirmed by the observations of Campbell at Mount Hamilton, _Henri

Deslandres_ at Meudon, and Bélopolsky at Pulkowa.

In 1851 a startling theory regarding Saturn’s rings was put forward by

the famous _Otto Wilhelm von Struve_ (1819-1905). Comparing his

measurements on the rings made at Pulkowa in 1850 and 1851 with those of

other astronomers for the past two hundred years, he reached the

conclusion that the inner diameter of the ring was decreasing at the

rate of sixty miles a-year, and that the bodies composing the rings were

being drawn closer to the planet. Accordingly, Struve calculated that

only three centuries would be required to bring about the precipitation

of the ring-system on to the globe of Saturn. In 1881 and 1882 Struve,

expecting a further decrease, made another series of measures, but these

did not confirm his theory, which was accordingly abandoned.

The study of the globe of Saturn has made less progress than that of the

rings. The surface of the planet had been known since before the time of

Herschel to be covered with belts, but as spots seldom appear on Saturn,

only one determination of the rotation period had been made, that by

Herschel. Much interest was aroused, therefore, by the discovery, by

Hall, at Washington, on December 7, 1876, of a bright equatorial spot.

Hall studied this spot during sixty rotations of the planet, determining

the period as 10 hours 14 minutes 24 seconds. This was confirmed by

Denning in 1891, and by _Stanley Williams_, an English observer, in the

same year. On June 16, 1903, Barnard, at the Yerkes Observatory,

discovered a bright spot, from which he deduced a rotation period of 10

hours 39 minutes,—a period considerably longer than that found by Hall.

In the same year various spots on Saturn were observed by Denning, who

found a period of 10 hours 37 minutes 56·4 seconds, and at Barcelona by

_José Comas Sola_, now director of the Observatory there, who may be

considered Spain’s leading astronomer. The result of these observations

has been to show that the spots on Saturn have probably a proper motion

of their own, apart from the rotation of the planet. As to the spectrum

of Saturn, little has been learned. It closely resembles that of

Jupiter. In 1867 Janssen, observing from the summit of Mount Etna, found

traces of aqueous vapour in the planet’s atmosphere.

In the chapters on Herschel we have seen that he discovered the sixth

and seventh satellites of Saturn. The next discovery was made on

September 19, 1848, by W. C. Bond, at Harvard, Massachusetts, and

independently by _William Lassell_ (1799-1880), at Starfield, near

Liverpool. The new satellite received the name of Hyperion, and was

found to be situated at a distance of about 946,000 miles from Saturn.

Its small size led Sir John Herschel to the idea that it might be an

asteroidal satellite. Fifty years elapsed before another satellite of

Saturn was discovered. In 1888 W. H. Pickering commenced a photographic

search for new satellites of the planet. At last, on developing some

photographs of Saturn, taken on August 16, 17, and 18, 1898, he found

traces of a new satellite which he named “Phœbe.” But, as the satellite

was not seen or photographed again for some years, many astronomers were

sceptical as to its existence. However, photographs taken in 1900, 1901,

and 1902 revealed the satellite, which was again photographed in 1904,

and seen visually by Barnard in the same year with the 40-inch Yerkes

telescope. At that time the discoverer brought out the amazing fact that

the motion of the satellite is retrograde—a fact which he attempts to

explain by a new theory of the former rotation of Saturn. He likewise

demonstrated that its distance from Saturn varied from 6,120,000 to

9,740,000 miles. Early in 1905 Pickering announced the discovery of a

tenth satellite of Saturn, which received the name of Themis, with a

period and mean distance nearly similar to Hyperion, so that Sir John

Herschel’s idea of Hyperion being an asteroidal satellite is being

confirmed after a lapse of half a century.

If little is known of the globe of Saturn, still less is known regarding

Uranus. Dusky bands resembling those of Jupiter were observed by Young

at Princeton in 1883. In the following year Paul and Prosper Henry

discerned at Paris two grey parallel lines on the disc of the planet.

This was confirmed by the observations of Perrotin at Nice, which also

indicated rotation in a period of ten hours. In 1890 Perrotin again took

up the study and re-observed the dark bands. On the other hand, no

definite results regarding the planet were obtained by the Lick

observers in 1889 and 1890. Measurements of the planet by Young,

Schiaparelli, Perrotin, and others indicate a considerable polar

compression. The spectrum of the planet has been studied by Secchi,

Huggins, Vogel, Keeler, Slipher, and others. The spectrum shows six

bands of original absorption, a line of hydrogen, which, says Miss

Clerke, “implies accordingly the presence of free hydrogen in the

Uranian atmosphere, where a temperature must thus prevail sufficiently

high to reduce water to its constituent elements.” From a photographic

study of the spectrum at the Lowell Observatory in 1904, Slipher

observed a line corresponding to that of helium, indicating the presence

of that element in the planet’s atmosphere.

Herschel left our knowledge of the Uranian satellites in a very

uncertain state. The two outer satellites, Titania and Oberon, were

rediscovered in 1828 by his son, but the other four, which he was

believed to have discovered, were never seen again. In 1847 two inner

satellites, Ariel and Umbriel, were discovered by Lassell and Otto

Struve respectively, their existence being finally confirmed by

Lassell’s observations in 1851.

After the discovery of Uranus by Herschel, mathematical astronomers

determined its orbit and calculated its position in the future. _Alexis

Bouvard_, the calculating partner of Laplace, published tables of the

planet’s motions, founded on observations made by various astronomers

who had considered it a star before its discovery by Herschel; but as

the planet was not in the exact position which Bouvard predicted, he

rejected the earlier observations altogether. For a few years the planet

conformed to the Frenchman’s predictions, but shortly afterwards it was

again observed to move in an irregular manner, and the discrepancy

between observation and the calculations of mathematicians became

intolerable. Did the law of gravitation not hold good for the frontiers

of the Solar System? Gradually astronomers arrived at the conclusion

that Uranus was being attracted off its course by the influence of an

unseen body, an exterior planet. Bouvard himself was one of the first to

make the suggestion, but died before the planet was discovered. An

English amateur, the Rev. _T. J. Hussey_, resolved to make, in 1834, a

determination of the place of the unseen body, but found his powers

inadequate; and in 1840 Bessel laid his plans for an investigation of

the problem, but failing health prevented him carrying out his design.

In 1841 a student at the University of Cambridge resolved to grapple

with the problem. John Couch Adams, born at Lidcot in Cornwall in 1819,

entered in 1839 the University of Cambridge, where he graduated in 1843.

From 1858 Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge, and from 1861 director of

the Observatory, he died on January 21, 1892, after a life spent in

devotion to mathematical astronomy. In 1843, on taking his degree, he

commenced the investigation of the orbit of Uranus. For two years he

worked at the difficult question, and by September 1845 came to the

conclusion that a planet revolving at a certain distance beyond Uranus

would produce the observed irregularities. He handed to _James Challis_

(1803-1882), the director of the Cambridge Observatory, a paper

containing the elements of what was named by Adams “the new planet.” On

October 21 of the same year he visited Greenwich Observatory, and left a

paper containing the elements of the planet, and approximately fixing

its position in the heavens. But the Astronomer-Royal of England, Sir

_George Biddell Airy_ (1801-1892), had little faith in the calculations

of the young mathematician. He always considered the correctness of a

distant mathematical result to be a subject rather of moral than of

mathematical evidence: in fact, regarding Uranus, the Astronomer-Royal

almost called in question the correctness of the law of gravitation.

Besides, the novelty of the investigations aroused scepticism, and the

fact that Adams was a young man, and inexperienced, went against Airy’s

acceptance of the theory. However, he wrote to Adams questioning him on

the soundness of his idea. Adams thought the matter trivial, and did not

reply. Airy, therefore, took no interest in the investigations, and no

steps were taken to search for the unseen planet. Meanwhile the Rev. W.

R. Dawes happened to see Adams’ papers lying at Greenwich, and wrote to

his friend, the well-known astronomer Lassell, who was in possession of

a very fine reflector, erected at his residence near Liverpool, asking

him to search for the planet. But Lassell was suffering from a sprained

ankle, and Dawes’ letter was accidentally destroyed by a housemaid. So

Adams’ theory remained in obscurity.

The question now came under the notice of _François Jean Dominique

Arago_ (1786-1853), the director of the Paris Observatory. He recognised

in a young friend of his a rising genius, who was competent to solve the

problem. Urban Jean Joseph Le Verrier, born at Saint Lo, in Normandy, in

1811, became in 1837 astronomical teacher in the École Polytechnique,

and in 1853 director of the Paris Observatory. In consequence of

differences with his staff he was obliged, in 1870, to resign from this

position, but two years later was restored to the post, which he held

till his death on September 23, 1877.

In 1845, ignorant of the fact that Adams had already solved the problem,

Le Verrier began his investigations of the irregular motions of Uranus.

In a memoir communicated to the Academy of Sciences in November of that

year, he demonstrated that no known causes could produce these

disturbances. In a second memoir, dated June 1, 1846, he announced that

an exterior planet alone could produce these effects. But Le Verrier had

now before him the difficult task of assigning an approximate position

to the unseen body, so that it might be telescopically discovered. After

much calculation Le Verrier, in his third memoir (August 31, 1846),

assigned to the planet a position in the constellation Aquarius.

Meanwhile one of Le Verrier’s papers happened to reach Airy. Seeing its

resemblance to Adams’ papers, which had been lying on his desk for

months, his scepticism vanished, and he suggested to Challis that the

planet should be searched for with the Cambridge equatorial. In July

1846 the search was commenced. The planet was actually observed on

August 4 and 12, but, owing to the absence of star maps, it was not

recognised. “After four days of observing,” he wrote to Airy, “the

planet was in my grasp if I had only examined or mapped the

observations.”

Le Verrier wrote to Encke, the illustrious director of the Berlin

Observatory, desiring him to make a telescopic search for a planetary

object situated in the constellation Aquarius, as bright as a star of

the eighth magnitude and possessed of a visible disc. “Look where I tell

you,” wrote the French astronomer, “and you will see an object such as I

describe.” Encke ordered his two assistants, Galle and D’Arrest, to make

a search on the night of September 23, 1846. In a few hours Galle

observed an object not marked in the star-maps of the Berlin

Observatory, which had been recently published. The following night

sufficed to show that the object was in motion, and was therefore a new

planet. On September 29 Challis found the planet at Cambridge, but he

was too late, as the priority of the discovery was now lost to Adams.

The planet received the name of “Neptune.”

For some time, indeed, it appeared as if the French astronomer alone was

to receive the honour of the discovery. But on October 3, 1846, a letter

from Sir John Herschel appeared in the ‘Athenæum’ in which he referred

to the discovery made by Adams. The French scientists were extremely

jealous. Indeed, Arago actually declared that, when Neptune was under

discussion, the entire honour should go to Le Verrier, and the name of

Adams should not even be mentioned,—Arago’s line of reasoning being that

it was not the man who first made a discovery who should receive the

credit, but he who first made it public. However, the credit of the

discovery is now given equally to Adams and Le Verrier, both of whom are

regarded as among the greatest of astronomers.

Only a fortnight after the discovery of Neptune, the astronomer Lassell

observed a satellite to the distant planet on October 10, 1846. This

discovery was confirmed in July 1847 by the discoverer himself, and

shortly afterwards by Bond and Otto Struve. Regarding the globe of

Neptune, we know practically nothing. No markings of any kind have been

observed on its surface. However, in 1883 and 1884, _Maxwell Hall_, an

astronomer in Jamaica, noticed certain variations of brilliance which

suggested a rotation-period of eight hours, but this was not confirmed

by any other astronomer. The spectrum of Neptune has been investigated

by various observers, who have found it to be similar to that of Uranus.

The existence of a trans-Neptunian planet has been suspected by many

astronomers. In November 1879 the first idea of its existence was thrown

out by Flammarion in his ‘Popular Astronomy.’ Flammarion noticed that

all the periodical comets in the Solar System have their aphelion near

the orbit of a planet. Thus Jupiter owns about eighteen comets; Saturn

owns one, and probably two; Uranus two or three; and Neptune six. The

third comet of 1862, however, along with the August meteors, goes

farther out than the orbit of Neptune. Accordingly, Flammarion suggested

the existence of a great planet, assigning it a period of 330 years and

a distance of 4000 millions of miles.

Two independent investigators, _David Peck Todd_ (born 1855) in America

and _George Forbes_ in Scotland, have since undertaken to find the

planet. Todd, utilising the “residual perturbations” of Uranus, assigned

a period of 375 years for his planet. Forbes, on the other hand, working

from the comet theory, stated his belief in the existence of two planets

with periods of 1000 and 5000 years respectively. In October 1901 he

computed the position of the new planet on the celestial sphere, fixing

its position in the constellation Libra, and computing its size to be

greater than Jupiter. A search was made by means of photography, in

1902, but without success. Nevertheless, astronomers are pretty

confident of the existence of one or more trans-Neptunian planets.

Lowell is very definite on this subject when he says in regard to meteor

groups, “The Perseids and the Lyrids go out to meet the unknown planet,

which circles at a distance of about forty-five astronomical units from

the Sun. It may seem strange to speak thus confidently of what no mortal

eye has seen, but the finger of the sign-board of phenomena points so

clearly as to justify the definite article. The eye of analysis has

already suspected the invisible.”

A Century's Progress in Astronomy · 第 6 / 13 章